Mediaboss Marketing

CHATTANOOGA, TN (WRCB) - The Chattanooga police officer at the center of a TBI criminal investigation appeared in court Friday.

Detective Karl Fields was in court, testifying as the lead investigator in Cordalro Strickland's murder case. But most of the questions revolved around the criminal investigation into the detective, prompting Fields to plead the Fifth Amendment over 15 times.

Fields was put on administrative leave last month, following allegations of inappropriate contact with a woman who filed a rape report.

There were questions whether or not the detective could testify in the upcoming murder trial while he was under a criminal probe himself. On Friday, attorneys argued whether or not a jury could hear the most recent allegations against the police officer.

"I'm currently on administrative leave," Fields said.

"Why are you on administrative leave?" asked Strickland's attorney, Brandy Spurgin.

"Undergoing investigation by internal affairs and TBI," Fields replied.

The legal fallout is crossing over into some of the cases Fields worked, namely Strickland's, who is charged with first degree murder in the 2011 shooting death of Melvin Fennell.

Fields answered questions about the case, but he was also grilled about his inappropriate contact with the alleged rape victim.

"Did you joke with another officer that videos in that case were YouTube material?" Spurgin asked.

See the article here:
Detective dodges questions about allegations made during rape investigation

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (WOFL FOX 35 ORLANDO) -

Both former Governor Charlie Crist and current Governor Rick Scott turned up the heat in their final debate before the election, with both men making it clear they do not like each other and both men taking multiple opportunities to attack their opponent over personal wealth and other issues. One repeatedly called the other by first name before taking their jabs.

On personal character and ethics

Crist employed the same type of attacks he has used on television about Scott, pointing to his tenure at HCA/Columbia, a hospital chain which was fined $1.7 billion for Medicare fraud. Crist repeated a line from one of those ads, saying that Scott once invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination while questioned about an unrelated civil lawsuit.

Rick you talk about being accountable. How were you accountable with HCA at all? asked Crist.

Scott raised questions about associates of Crist, including Scott Rothstein, who was convicted and imprisoned for masterminding one of the state's largest Ponzi schemes, and Jim Greer, the disgraced former chairman of the Republican Party of Florida, who served time after pleading guilty to theft and money laundering.

"Scott Rothstein testified, under oath, that Charlie was paid to appoint judges," said Scott. "His hand-picked party chairmen went to prison."

On raising the minimum wage and job creation

One issue the pair returned to was the minimum wage. Scott and Crist were on opposite sides of this issue like many others.

The private sector determines wages," said Scott. "Let's look at actually what happened. When Charlie says he wants to raise the minimum wage, that, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would lose $500,000 jobs. Charlie, you lost 832,000 jobs when you were governor. How many more jobs can we lose?

See the original post:
Scott and Crist have heated and personal final debate before November election

PITTSBURGH -- An evidence suppression hearing for Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School founder Nick Trombetta will stretch into November after another day of arguments Monday was more notable for who did not testify than for who did.

Beaver County solicitor Joe Askar, who also represents the Rochester-based National Network of Digital Schools, invoked his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination and refused to testify. Askar was subpoenaed by Trombettas defense team in their effort to get recorded conversations with attorneys, including him, tossed out by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Joy Flowers Conti.

Trombetta -- who faces 11 federal charges -- is claiming that the FBI violated his attorney-client privilege by recording discussions with Askar, former PA Cyber attorney Timothy Barry, and Ralph Monico and Leo Daly, attorneys who also represented NNDS. A Sept. 30 hearing was continued until Monday.

Mr. Askar has neither committed nor been charged with any crime. Nor will he be. As the U.S. Supreme Court has said, the privilege is available not only to protect the guilty, but also the innocent: We have emphasized that one of the Fifth Amendments basic functions is to protect innocent men, who otherwise might be ensnared by ambiguous circumstances, Bruce Teitelbaum, Askars attorney, said in a statement.

The ambiguities inherent in this complex matter and the possibility of misunderstanding compelled me, out of caution, to advise Mr. Askar to invoke his privilege, Teitelbaum said.

Barry was called to the stand by defense attorney Adam Hoffinger later in the day, but was excused after a lengthy off-the-record sidebar involving his attorney, Trombettas lawyers and prosecutors. Hoffinger said Barry would be recalled when the hearing continues next month.

Trombetta attorney Robert Salerno quizzed FBI agent Samantha Bell, the lead investigator, on synopses of calls monitored by agents, instructions to agents on recording calls and minimization, the FBIs name for when agents stop listening to calls that are irrelevant or might be protected by attorney-client privilege.

After Barry was excused, FBI agent Paul Allen took the stand and was questioned by Hoffinger on a June 2012 synopsis of a recorded call on which he noted that Trombetta would be talking to his attorney.

Hoffinger wondered how agents could know when to stop recording privileged communications if they truly did not know whether Trombetta had a personal attorney. Allen said he did not exactly remember, but testified that he might have simply written the note to be cautious.

Im not sure why I used the personal pronoun his, Allen said. I didnt mean anything by it.

Read the rest here:
Agents questioned, Askar takes the Fifth in Trombetta hearing

Property Rights | Century Law Group
http://fighteminentdomain.com/ | Century Law Group | Eminent domain is provided for in the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as a section of property rights. This allows a government...

By: Century Law

More:
Property Rights | Century Law Group - Video

PREMIUM LEGAL RESOURCES LEGAL FORMS ASK A LAWYER

'No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.'

The Fifth Amendment 'can be asserted in any proceeding, civil or criminal, administrative or judicial, investigatory or adjudicatory; and it protects against any disclosures which the witness reasonably believes could be used in a criminal prosecution or could lead to other evidence that might be so used.' Kastigar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441, 44-45 ('72). A reasonable belief that information concerning income or assets might be used to establish criminal failure to file a tax return can support a claim of Fifth Amendment privilege. See U.S. v. Rendahl, 746 F.2d 553, 55-56 (9th Cir.'84).

The only way the Fifth Amendment can be asserted as to testimony is on a question-by-question basis. Rendahl, 746 F.2d at 555, citing with approval U.S. v. Bell, 448 F.2d 40, 42 (9th Cir.'71) (Fifth Amendment challenge premature on appeal from enforcement order; appellant must present himself for questioning after enforcement and as to each question elect to raise or not to raise the defense).

The appropriate device for compelling answers to incriminating questions is a government grant of use immunity. See Sharp, 920 F.2d at 1172.

Google+

Original post:
"Fifth Amendment" Defined & Explained - Law